Reference Material

Disclaimer, Copyright

The U.S.S. Mariner is in no way affiliated with, condoned or given any notice by the Seattle Mariners baseball team, who have their own website. Similarly, we have no association with the ownership group or any businesses related to the Mariners. All article text is written by the authors, all pictures are taken by the authors, who retain copyright to their works. No copying or reproduction of any content here, photographic or otherwise, is authorized. Please email us if you wish to reproduce our work.

Lloyd McClendon: Leader Of These Men

For FanGraphs, right now, I’m writing about a new trend around MLB toward hiring managers with little or no managerial background. Mike Matheny didn’t have a track record when he was hired by the Cardinals. Neither did Robin Ventura when he was hired by the White Sox, and neither did Walt Weiss when he was hired by the Rockies. Recently, the Tigers hired Brad Ausmus, and the Reds promoted Bryan Price, and the Nationals hired Matt Williams. It feels to me like six is meaningful — it feels to me teams around the league are less afraid of inexperience than ever before. Word is the Mariners are hiring Lloyd McClendon. He’s been the only guy linked to the Mariners who’s managed much before. He was in charge of the Pirates for five years at the beginning of the millennium, and the Pirates totally sucked.

On this basis alone, it’s beyond easy to be cynical. It was probably going to be easy to be cynical, regardless, since cynicism is our Seattle Mariners battle station, but here the team is visibly going against a new trend. It’s hiring a guy with a history, and whose history wasn’t successful. The Mariners are passing up an opportunity to try something new and different, something which might really shake things up.

We can do better than that, though. For one thing, I don’t know if there’s evidence that the trend toward inexperience is good, bad, or neutral. It’s new, and new is different, but new isn’t always an improvement, and it’s not like Mike Matheny was a tactical wizard in the playoffs. And while McClendon managed some bad Pirates teams, we can’t allow that to automatically color our impression of McClendon as a leader. Jason Kendall played for a lot of those Pirates teams, and he didn’t suck just because the team sucked. Maybe McClendon was a good manager. Maybe the situation was too utterly hopeless. Maybe McClendon wasn’t a good manager then, but he’s learned a lot more since.

Let’s construct a hypothetical manager WAR. Let’s say the hypothetical manager WAR is perfect, with all the right inputs and all the right weights. For those Pirates teams, we can say that manager McClendon was worth x WAR, where x could be basically any number. We have absolutely no idea if McClendon was good. We have absolutely no idea, in turn, if McClendon was bad. Even if we were to know something about McClendon back then, we’d have absolutely no idea if McClendon stood to do well with these Mariners, with this roster that isn’t even close to complete.

It all comes back to the reality that we’re dealing with things we don’t know about. There’s no shame in admitting that — better to be up front, than to pretend like any of us is insightful. It seemed weird that the Mariners talked to Dave Valle about managing, but, who knows? The Mariners are hiring Lloyd McClendon, and that seems kind of lazy, but, who knows? You’re allowed to have an opinion when you don’t know anything. I have an opinion here. But you have to understand it’s just an opinion, and there isn’t any actual substance. They’re feelings based on feelings.

Maybe it’s meaningful that McClendon didn’t get hired by the Tigers, for whom he’s long been the hitting coach beside Jim Leyland. McClendon has coached with the Tigers since leaving the Pirates, and he’s probably learned from Leyland, and he got himself an interview after Leyland announced his resignation, but the Tigers went with Ausmus, who’s never managed before. Maybe the Tigers know that McClendon wouldn’t make for a good manager today. Or maybe they just like Ausmus better. Or maybe they messed up. Or maybe, for whatever reason, McClendon wouldn’t be a great fit in Detroit, but he’ll be a better fit in Seattle.

This is all to say the same thing: no idea. I’ve got no idea. This post could be one sentence: Mariners hiring Lloyd McClendon. But I will now touch on my feeling. Among the Mariners’ managerial candidates, McClendon intrigued me the least. He seems like an old-school guy, a retread, a safe selection in that he’s an uninteresting selection. He’s probably got old-school ideas and old-school methods, and he’s probably not what you’d refer to as the “thinking type”. Lloyd McClendon has never managed the Mariners before, but he’s probably going to feel pretty familiar, and at some point he’s probably going to get fired. Lloyd McClendon isn’t going to challenge anything but those dog-gone entitled vets in spring training, who think they’ll just be handed a job, but no, everyone’s got to fight, everyone’s got to earn it. McClendon, actually, is probably going to sound a lot like Eric Wedge, and people didn’t like Wedge much.

But that’s a feeling and it doesn’t matter because it’s not based in evidence. Maybe Wedge was a fantastic manager during his time! Again, no idea. We can’t say anything about Wedge and McClendon as managers except that they have been managers, and their teams have lost more games than they’ve won. Some of you might have particularly strong opinions about the McClendon hire. They probably aren’t warranted. Most of you are probably more negative than positive, but we’re all negative about the Mariners, and managerial hires are like tofu, in that they absorb the flavor around them. I think there’ll be a negative response to this move because we’re all prepared to be negative about this team. It’s going to take a lot to turn that around.

There’s nothing about Lloyd McClendon that excites me. I don’t know if I would’ve been excited about Tim Wallach or Chip Hale or Joey Cora and the answer is probably not, no. This move feels safe and predictable and lazy and bad, but there’s not actually any evidence to back that up, and unless we’re way off in how we think about coaching staffs, the fate of the Mariners going forward will be determined for the most part by the players on the 40-man roster. If McClendon’s going to have any chance, the Mariners need a lot more talent. And if they get so much talent McClendon can’t possibly screw it up, then we’ll all love him in the end. Get to work, front office. You’ve made the move we can’t criticize. Now for everything else, all the moves we can. That’s the important bit, and you’ve got a whole team to make better.

Tags:

Comments

44 Responses to “Lloyd McClendon: Leader Of These Men”

Westside guy on
November 5th, 2013 3:58 pm

Lloyd McLendon had a lot of experience managing a team that sucked year in, year out. He should feel right at home here.

(No, I’m not blaming him for the suckitude of the Pirates)

But hey! Not a catcher! Although apparently he was originally drafted as one…

diderot on
November 5th, 2013 4:04 pm

Lincoln and Z both said they were looking primarily for a ‘teacher’. My guess is they thought McClendon filled that role best.

SonOfZavaras on
November 5th, 2013 4:04 pm

I was really, REALLY hoping for Tim Wallach.

A pro’s pro as a player, intelligent, apparently the same kind of old school/new school combo as what I think Brad Ausmus is- the main difference would’ve been the Ivy League schooling.

Well, Lloyd McClendon…welcome aboard. It’s almost the exact same sitch as what you had in Pittsburgh- a lot of youth, a nice ballpark and not much else.

But you DO get to run Felix out there every fifth day. You never had that in Pittsburgh.

Snuffy on
November 5th, 2013 4:15 pm

Preferred Chip Hale. We’ll see.

Breadbaker on
November 5th, 2013 4:40 pm

The combination of any manager and those to be managed seems more like a crapshoot to me. We hired Don Wakamatsu without experience and how did that turn out? Also, Maury Wills.

Swungonandbelted on
November 5th, 2013 5:30 pm

This feels like the “safe” hire, previous managerial experience (but not much success), coached one of the greatest offensive players in recent memory, with I’m sure the thought that he can maybe capture this team and get the perpetual underachievers to achieve where the previous string of managers hasn’t been able to. It feels like the most risk adverse of any of the finalists, but hopefully it doesn’t end up having a lower ceiling in terms of overall potential.

ibedavey on
November 5th, 2013 5:35 pm

Can’t say that this is an improvement but when one is given mediocre material to deal with what should we expect but another losing season and another fired manager.

Last time Chip Hale was considered, he went out of his way to praise Yuniesky Betancourt and his defense. Maybe he changed since then.

G-Man on
November 5th, 2013 5:45 pm

I wonder if those first-timers really wanted the job. Since it may well be a one-year gig with a bad team, that might have been looked at as a bad resume entry. It sure didn’t help Wakamatsu get another job and 1.5 years here. Melvin came out of it OK, albeit after a longer tenure that included one pretty good season.

MrZDevotee on
November 5th, 2013 5:54 pm

I think I’m okay with this… I’m not sure it was actually the right time for a hard 90 degree left turn at the manager position. That would seem a better approach if/when the GM is replaced and new philosophies come in at the top of the chain. An “old school” guy, with a better approach than Wedge (whatever that might be) is probably what a plan like Dave’s “Offseason 2013 Plan” would do well under…

Wedge always seemed to sort of defer to the veterans, anyone with a longer career than his, regardless of how they were performing, but I don’t think McLendon will have a problem sitting down a guy if he’s not cutting it. And I don’t think he’ll just rant and bitch about guys not performing in the press– he’ll just sit them down. Keep it internal.

Steady wins the race. An old Sea-weathered captain who can steer the ship with his eyes closed is probably a good fit given the precarious situation of the current club.

godtomsatan on
November 5th, 2013 6:02 pm

Yeah, i’m sure all the dudes that have never had an MLB managerial gig thought to themselves that they’d hold out for a better opportunity….

I react with near total apathy. Which is much, much more positive than the reaction I’d heard the name “Dave Valle” bandied about any longer.

Here’s to an entertaining meltdown or two in his tenure.

New England Fan on
November 5th, 2013 6:58 pm

When I lived in Vermont in the mid 1980, Lloyd McClendon was a catcher/infielder for the Reds AA farm team that played in Burlington (the same team that eventually became the M’s farm team that KGJ played for, but that’s irrelevant). He was even in those days a pretty fiery competitor, and he did make it to MLB even though he was probably not the most talented player on that team (those teams included Paul O’Neil, Chris Sabo, Rob Murphy, Terry Lee, Barry Larkin, Rob Dibble, and a few other notable MLB stars and fringe players.

henryv on
November 5th, 2013 7:05 pm

Was Rob Dibble a deranged idiot then, too, or was he hit on the head at some point?

kennyb on
November 5th, 2013 7:05 pm

The team would be better off if they hire McClendon or Hale or Valle or Wallach to replace Lincoln and Armstrong.
Anyone, please anyone to replace those 2.

Longgeorge1 on
November 5th, 2013 7:18 pm

Anyone who can balance a checkbook can replace Lincoln and Armstrong. I understand McClendon is supposed to be a good teacher, well then he would be perfect in Tacoma. Play who is hot and manage by who is in the line-up and their capabilities. Put people in a position where they can succeed. After that it is up to the players to perform.

miscreant on
November 5th, 2013 7:42 pm

Well at least Lloyd McClendon has been to a World Series in some capacity recently.

He can tell all the kids on the Mariners stories about it. I can just see it now…

All the Mariners players are gathered around Lloyd McClendon in the locker room following a 23-8 Spring Training loss to the University of Arizona.

Seager: “Tell us the story about you going to the World Series Uncle Lloyd!”

Felix: “Yeah Tio, tell us again!”

At this point most of the other Mariners chime in clamoring at McClendon to tell the story.

Only Carter Capps is absent as he is lost in the desert with Carlos Castaneda searching for a secondary pitch.
Lloyd puts his hands up in surrender quieting the boys. “OK OK, I’ll tell you the story.”

“Will we ever get to go to the World Series Uncle Lloyd?” interrupts a wide-eyed, Billy Gibbons bearded Dustin Ackley.

A cloud comes over the room. Lloyd McClendon looks to the heavens, sighs and slowly shakes his head. “Sorry Boys, but as long as the evil clowns Chuckles and Howie have reign over the Good Ship Mariner she is doomed to flounder meekly, aimlessly lost at sea.

The locker room is dead silent except for The Mariner Moose quietly weeping in the corner.

Well at least Lloyd McClendon has been to a World Series in some capacity recently.

msfanmike on
November 5th, 2013 7:51 pm

Eight year “job interview” wasn’t enough to get him hired as Leylands replacement. Huh!

This fact probably does but paint a complete picture, but it might paint a substantial one.

dantheman on
November 5th, 2013 7:54 pm

I’m sorry but on what possible basis should one believe that McClendon will turn this team around? His record with Pittsburgh was abysmal – .430 win percentage and while the Pirates improved in years 2 and 3, they seriously regressed the next two years until McClendon was fired.

There are some managers (think Clint Hurdle and Pittsburgh) who can come in and actually turn a team around. There is nothing in McClendon’s record that suggests he is that type of manager. And for all the people that bashed Dusty Baker, you might just want to look at the only stat that actually counts for a manager: wins. Baker led the Giants to 1st or 2nd place finishes in 8 of 10 seasons, got the Cubs in first (the only person other than Piniella to accomplish that in the past 24 years), and achieved 2 first place finishes with the Reds. I don’t care if he doesn’t know what WAR is – he’s a winner (averaging 85 wins a year – better than Lou). Incredibly, but not surprisingly, the Mariners have managed to blow it again.

New England Fan on
November 5th, 2013 7:54 pm

—> henryv

Robbie Dibble was not a problem on VT Reds – he became a head case later on. Norm Charlton was on the last Reds team (before the Ms took over) but he was a starter who converted to a reliever. Good memories, but off topic. The main point is that it is true that Lloyd does have a passion for the game and managed to get to the top without as much talent as some of his peers. There were players on those Reds teams that had more talent than McClendon who never got past AAA.

smb on
November 5th, 2013 8:13 pm

I’m more sure now than ever before that who manages this team is pretty inconsequential in the grand scheme of things, both for this franchise and its fanbase, and for the league itself. Seems he’d need to be an emotionally resilient individual, for his own sanity as much as for the sake of wins, though.

That said, I guess I like this hire because McClendon seems an entertaining sort, what with the memorable meltdown, and being known for once stealing first and all. I figure it’s as good a reason as any, anymore.

kc10man on
November 5th, 2013 8:33 pm

Thank you Jeff for all the years of writing. I have been a silent reader for more years than I can count. But this is enough. Goodbye Mariners. Goodbye Mr Lincoln. Goodbye whatever douchbag coach will be here next year. Goodbye Mr hart, even though you are not here yet. Goodbye to mediocrity. I don’t care about the new scoreboard. I won’t buy a ticket again until we win at least 90 games in a year; you do not deserve my dedication. The only way I will pay any attention to you is if Tanaka and Ellesbury are BOTH suiting up in March. If the front office cannot see our desperation as the purportedly eighth largest market in the US and one of the most profitable, how can we in any way justify supporting them anymore? Go Seahawks!

Longgeorge1 on
November 5th, 2013 8:47 pm

Dear Miscreant; you ARE the winner! Perhaps the entire team should spend the spring in the desert with Carlos in search of the True Meaning. Carlos Castaneda our new pitching coach – worked for Bill Lee

The Hamms Bear on
November 5th, 2013 8:52 pm

There are some managers who can come in and actually turn a team around. There is nothing in McClendon’s record that suggests he is that type of manager. And for all the people that bashed Dusty Baker, you might just want to look at the only stat that actually counts for a manager: wins.

Come on. Cornelius McGillicuddy couldn’t turn this ship around.

David on
November 5th, 2013 9:05 pm

…the Mariner Moose quietly weeping in the corner.

miscreant, you made my day with that comment. Good stuff.

terryoftacoma on
November 5th, 2013 9:13 pm

I’d like to have an emotional reaction to this but I can’t muster one. Manager’s are no longer the the decision makers on a team. They are media handlers and club house handlers and the rest is the organization runs the team. The organization sets pitchers limits, decides what pitcher should pitch to which type of batter and hell, they tell the manager where to position his players on the field. The new managers don’t have to field manage, just follow directions. So it doesn’t matter who he is. Why not really think outside the box and not hire one.

BobbleHeadJunkie on
November 5th, 2013 9:46 pm

Great post Dave! My thoughts exactly! You hit one out of the park by saying this hiring was LAZY! I totally agree! Personally I was hoping for one of Wallach, Cora or Hale and of course the guy I wanted least is who the M’s hire. I’m beside myself and the only thing that can bring me out of this mood would be Seattle signing someone like Elsbury or Choo. I guess I can always root for the green hydroplane….

GarForever on
November 5th, 2013 9:48 pm

…meh…

LongDistance on
November 5th, 2013 10:47 pm

Well… we can say that he won’t have to be dealing with high expectations.

As for remarks about winning managers who win… it’s important to remember that it’s easier to be a winning manager who wins, when you not only have a winning team that wins, but a winning organisation that knows something about winning baseball.

At the very least we won’t have a manager either living in the past or resting on (in this case nonexisting) laurels.

Adam S on
November 5th, 2013 11:16 pm

I agree “lazy” is a good description.

That said, hiring a manager is generally a losing proposition. 90% of candidates fall into one of two categories:
1) Someone who has never managed in the majors before
2) Someone who managed so poorly that his last team fired him

Hire from the first group and you get criticized for hiring someone without experience. Hire from the second group, they say why did you hire the idiot who used to manage Team X.

McClendon seems like a good guy. I liked him as a manager in Pittsburgh until it all went south in his last year.

borris_g on
November 6th, 2013 4:33 am

According to LL, via Geoff Baker, McClendon got a multiyear deal and JackZ is going to have his contract extended. Even I don’t have more faith in Jack at least it shouldn’t be so obvious that he will punt the future for winning this year.
I know he has to win this year to be employed in 2015 but at least he isn’t working as a lame duck GM.

HighBrie on
November 6th, 2013 8:26 am

I wanted Wallach, but as Jeff states, we don’t know what makes a good manager, but we think there *are* things, like the equivalent of pitch framing for managers. Something in there that we don’t know how to measure. I think, from a comparative sense, it also seems like baseball is a sport where the stamp of coaches matters less to outcomes than other team sports. Is this true? I think it would help to really explore extremes (the managerless communal team aside), and hire Deep Blue, the chess computer to run our team on probabilities alone. I’m pretty sure it’s out of work, what with Kasparov busy in politics, and could be reprogrammed to anticipate platoons several moves in advance. At least, Lloyd, Deep Blue for bench coach and defensive coordinator! Please.

bergamot on
November 6th, 2013 9:08 am

Let’s wait and see. If McClendon calls for sacrifice bunts in the first inning, or bats the team’s worst hitter second because he’s on a hot streak, or lets a starting pitcher throw 120 pitches in a game in April, we’ll know who we’ve got.

Easley45 on
November 6th, 2013 9:09 am

Thanks for your public exodus kc10man. I’m sure many are saddened by the loss of your support. Hopefully, one day the Mariners will be able to meet your high standards of fandom.

casey on
November 6th, 2013 10:01 am

no doubt it is real tough being a fair weather Mariners fan … and yes thank goodness for the mental health of those fans that there is the safety net of the Seahawks band wagon to jump onto.

I think there is something to the Deep Blue idea. If a “geek” approach ever needed to be taken it is in Seattle. There was a guy on MLBTradeRumors who thought the M’s could be run by polling from fans and their cell phones in the stands. Seriously if there is a team in baseball that needs to take a sabermetric approach to decision making it is Seattle – I think Z needs to give this serious consideration going forward. Really hoping we don’t get any of the embarrassing anti-saber comments from McClendon along with the first inning bunts.

Until this team is built properly the Mariner Moose could manage them and it probably wouldn’t make much of a difference.

Celadus on
November 6th, 2013 10:51 am

On a mildly positive note, McClendon does have a reputation as being a good hitting coach. If a bunch of disappointing hitters improve markedly as a result of his being manager, I’ll call it a good hire.

He also appears to like the running game. This run scoring environment (i.e, the MLB-wide nosedive in average runs per team per year) might be more favorable for his approach–he managed the Pirates during a higher scoring era.

dantheman on
November 6th, 2013 1:07 pm

“As for remarks about winning managers who win… it’s important to remember that it’s easier to be a winning manager who wins, when you not only have a winning team that wins, but a winning organisation that knows something about winning baseball.”

As Bill James would say, let’s look at the actual numbers. In the 10 years before Dusty Baker became manager of the SF Giants, they had an overall winning percentage of .486 and had won 72 and 75 games in the two immediately preceding seasons. So much for a “winning organization that knows something about winning baseball”. What was Dusty’s win percentage in the next 10 years after he took over as manager? Try .540. The Mariners would kill for a .540 won loss percentage.

In Cincinnati, Baker managed for 6 years with a winning percentage of .524 (after once again taking over a team that had won just 72 games the previous season). What was Cincinnati’s won loss percentage in the 6 years before Dusty became manager? It was .461. Oh, and he took the Cubs from 67 wins to 1st place in his first year as Cubs manager. Tell us again how “easy” it is to be a manager in a “winning organization”.

terry on
November 6th, 2013 4:01 pm

I’ve never seen a FO that revels in “meh” with more gusto.

I think the fan base should be offended not by the Ms chronic ineptitude, but rather by how incredibly superficial the Ms leadership believes Ms fans to be.

LongDistance on
November 7th, 2013 9:17 am

dantheman,

You are right, I was inferring to Dusty Baker in my comment. And you believe Dusty Baker would make a hugely preferable manager to McClendon.

I could quibble hugely with some of what you stated. Do you really, really want to compare the Mariners to the 1992 Giants? Who, a) had just been sold to new owners (does this sound comparable?). Who, for example, had already added Barry Bonds to the roster before Baker came on board (does this sound comparable?).

Well… anyway…

Perhaps you’re right. Perhaps Dusty Baker would have been the foundation for turning the Mariners around.

Me, I think it would take much much more than the manager hiring, to do such a thing.

There’s something much more systemic going on.

But that’s just my opinion. I would love to believe otherwise, and that a winning manager is all it would take.

ripperlv on
November 7th, 2013 9:42 am

Maybe I’m alone here, but I like the hiring. Leland kept him around for a reason. From the comments and from the post, it’s doubtful that Casey Stengel would have generated any excitement! It’s hard.to predict what the winning formula is? How will Matt Williams do? He had a few disagreements with teammates in his day. Will that make him a good manager? What makes any of these new hires better than Lloyd? Maybe nothing, maybe they just sound better? He wouldn’t have made it this far without a lot of baseball people saying he deserves it. That doesn’t mean he’ ll be great, but I’m not going to knock the pick because he isn’t the fashionable pick of the week. Go Lloyd.

G-Man on
November 7th, 2013 12:21 pm

“There was a guy on MLBTradeRumors who thought the M’s could be run by polling from fans and their cell phones in the stands. Seriously if there is a team in baseball that needs to take a sabermetric approach to decision making it is Seattle ”

Please, don’t give them any ideas. They’ll probably charge for the privilege, too.

However, Lincoln doesn’t want us to pay attention to what’s going on on the field, he wants us to enjoy the ballpark experience. That’s what he said in that interview linked here last month. So he’ll probably disallow fan management.

dantheman on
November 7th, 2013 12:34 pm

“Me, I think it would take much much more than the manager hiring, to do such a thing.
There’s something much more systemic going on.”

I couldn’t agree more.

Eastside Suds on
November 7th, 2013 2:57 pm

Although there have been comments about McClendon being a boring and “safe” pick, I wonder who would be better that is available and would want this job?

McClendon is one of the few applicants who has MLB managerial experience and has learned from a very successful manager in a very successful franchise for quite a few years leading to this point. That can’t be said for the other candidates.

Pedigree – Played as a catcher (drafted as one), has played as a MLB outfielder and 1st baseman. Managed a young, struggling team with Pittsburg, so he knows what it’s like to battle through adversity. Before 2013, the Pirates endured 20 years of absolute horrid baseball. Through this period, they were an average of 68-94. McClendon was slightly better at 70-92. Both are Marineresque, but you can’t blame, with a straight face, bad Pittsburg baseball on McClendon.

He obviously does not accept, not tolerate losing and playing poorly as is evidenced by his historical outbursts that rivaled our beloved Mr. Pineilla. A little piss and vinegar would be welcome after what we have had the past 8 years.
He has been a Major League Bullpen Coach, Hitting Coach, Bench Coach (interim) and has made Major League Game decisions and lineups. He also comes highly regarded in managing young players and old alike by Jim Leyland.

What we might see due to his time in Detroit and Jim Leyland:
1) Allow starters to go longer into games and not be a dead-set pitch count guy.

2) Will make defensive replacements a priority when M’s have the lead late.

3) We may see some piss and vinegar. See some guys open up a can of woop ass every now and then. Slide harder into second, roll some catchers, knock some batters down. Just get some nastiness.

4) Improve our hitting philosophy and success rate. He has been the hitting coach for one of the best offensive teams in baseball the past 5 years. It hasn’t just been the Miggy show.

He won’t be the messiah or a miracle worker. I don’t know about the critics, but I think Jack got this one right. Welcome Lloyd!!